Ruger vs S&W for quality and reliability

[FloridaFlier]

Since I only own S&W's, I can't comment on the match-up. I will say, however, that S&W is better because Ruger is in the market, and vice-versa. People are always making comparisons, and swapping a few shots at every gun range in America. Each manufacturer looks at the other's sales and model lineup before introducing a new model.
As long as there is no clear across-the-board winner, we win!

 

[bbqbob51]

I am a fan of both and own examples of both and consider them to be pretty much equal insofar as quality and reliability. I have a Ruger Single Six with a 9.5" barrel, a 7 shot S&W 686+ with a 4" barrel, and my carry gun is a Ruger LCR in 38spl.
I think you can never go wrong with the time proven Single Six and I looked at and handled both the GP100 and the 686+ and went with the 686+ because of the extra round. When I bought my LCR I also looked at and handled a stainless J-Frame Smith and Wesson snub nose. I chose the LCR because of the superior trigger pull.
My brother has a 4" bbl Ruger GP100 and when compared side by side the GP100 appear to be a bit beefier but in fact it is only 1/10th oz. heavier than the 686+.

 

[walkin' trails]

What I saw of S&W versus Ruger was from my time in the Border Patrol in the days before the patrol converted to pistols. I was issued a 686, but Security Sixes were also common, and there were a few K-frame 19s and 66s still riding in holsters. I will say that a Security Six with a lot of rounds thru it would develop a fairly decent trigger. The 686s had relatively decent triggers to start with. In 1992-93, the patrol started issuing Ruger GP100s to new classes.

In the patrol, we qualified with our duty ammo - 110 grain Federal .357. If you wanted to buy them yourself, you could carry Winchester Silvertip .357 as an option. I never saw either one blow up with factory ammo, although some of the 66s were quite out of time by then. Once in a while on the firing line, I'd see a 686 suffer from the ejector rod coming unscrewed. I also saw more than a few GP100s just locking up after about 30 rounds of magnum. Seemed that the heat expanded something that wouldn't allow the cylinder to turn. The S&Ws' tolerances always seemed more loose than a Ruger or Colt, and I've never seen one lock up for that reason.

Shoot a lot of magnums out of a forged S&W and it might eventually shoot loose. Shoot a bunch of magnums from an investment cast Ruger and it also might shoot loose. Most shooters never shoot that many magnums, or hot loaded reloads, however, so it probably won't ever be an issue.

Given all of the above and then some, its all boils down to what your personal preferences are.

 

[rwsmith]

Ruger's forte

Ruger makes STRONG guns.

 

[357Ruger]

I am a Ruger guy and a Smith & Wesson guy. I would be hard pressed to say that one company makes better revolvers over the other. My Ruger GP100 is a superb but my son's 686+ is too. I like the SP101 .357 better than comparable Smiths, but then again Ruger does not make anything comparable to the superb S&W 627 and 625.

Great comment on this thread that the shortcomings of the pre-1980s revolvers are less well known because there was no internet!

Both companies seem to have mastered the fit-and-finish issue because customers demand it:

I wish Ruger would make something comparable to the 625 and 610. Two of my favorite handguns. Not that I would plan on getting rid of my Smiths, it would just be good to have more options.

I have had issues with each brand, each gun was fixed to my satisfaction and at no expense to me. I hate the S&W lock but have some revolvers with it and they seem to work well. Both great companies and we should feel fortunate to have them.

If Smith would drop the lock my Ruger double action revolvers would no longer outnumber my Smiths. Why do I have the option to buy an MP pistol without the lock or magazine disconnect but no option to buy a revolver without the lock???

 

[mc5aw]

Never met a Ruger revolver that I'd keep over a S&W, lock or no-lock.

And for a fraction of what a gunsmith might charge for removing the IL, a person could buy a nice set of firearms screwdrivers then DIY in 10 minutes by watching the video.

 

[Quakertown]

I bought a NIB Ruger Redhawk 44mag with 7.5" barrel, blued a cpl yrs ago. Seemed fine at first, but then noticed trigger pull got stiffer at 5, then 6th cylinder position was near impossible. I sent it back to Ruger and it came back a few weeks later with part of the cylinder shaved and not reblued. ???? WT*?? This struck me as totally unprofessional and didn't live up to the proported Ruger service reputation. I sold it soon afterwards.
I have not bought any IL-era S&W's, ever, so I can't comment on recent quality S&W's.

 

[S&W1006]

I own both S&W and Ruger revolvers. Ruger triggers are not as smooth as a S&W but they are very rugged revolvers. If you plan to shoot a lot of heavy magnum loads the Rugers are hard to beat and there is no comparison on price especially in the used market. I picked up a great used 4 inch stainless Ruger Security Six for 325. I wish I could buy Smith revolvers that cheap. With that said if you are looking for a revolver to hold it's value go with a Smith but if your like me and buy them to shoot don't worry about it. From my experience you will probably want to lighten the double action trigger pull if you buy a Ruger the trigger pull is stupid heavy . I bought Wolff springs for both of my Rugers real quick. I don't think you can go wrong either way you go.

 

[Stainz]

I started my non-bp revolver life with a Ruger convertible .45 Blackhawk, eventually owning a slew of BH's, SBH, Vaquero's, Single Six, SSM, SP-101, RH, & my first-ever DA revolver, a .454 SRH. Every last one of them was delivered as a 'work in progress'. My new .45 Colt RH was delivered new needing another cylinder! In fairness, that is the only one that went back to Ruger, returning with a new cylinder, hammer, and trigger. I had become quite adept at cleaning up Rugers, thanks to the fine folks on the Ruger forum. There was no way to correct the two .32 H&RM's, an SP-101 & a BHG SSM, as they had nearly too large chamber ID's. I discovered S&W 10.5yr ago with my new .45 Colt 625MG - and my Rugers' days were numbered, the last leaving here five years ago - except for the bp C&B 'Old Army' - it's my only bp gun.

I like the calibers/sizes/construction/models S&W makes better - as well as their, at least from my perspective, far better reliability and QC. The only Ruger I miss is that .454 SRH, but I am sure my wrists don't miss it despite it's ergonomics. And, hammer forged and heat treated frames, barrels, cylinders can weigh less and be just as strong as cast parts - and Ruger is an industry leader in casting. Just my experiences.

Stainz

 

[S&W1006]

I started my non-bp revolver life with a Ruger convertible .45 Blackhawk, eventually owning a slew of BH's, SBH, Vaquero's, Single Six, SSM, SP-101, RH, & my first-ever DA revolver, a .454 SRH. Every last one of them was delivered as a 'work in progress'. My new .45 Colt RH was delivered new needing another cylinder! In fairness, that is the only one that went back to Ruger, returning with a new cylinder, hammer, and trigger. I had become quite adept at cleaning up Rugers, thanks to the fine folks on the Ruger forum. There was no way to correct the two .32 H&RM's, an SP-101 & a BHG SSM, as they had nearly too large chamber ID's. I discovered S&W 10.5yr ago with my new .45 Colt 625MG - and my Rugers' days were numbered, the last leaving here five years ago - except for the bp C&B 'Old Army' - it's my only bp gun.

I like the calibers/sizes/construction/models S&W makes better - as well as their, at least from my perspective, far better reliability and QC. The only Ruger I miss is that .454 SRH, but I am sure my wrists don't miss it despite it's ergonomics. And, hammer forged and heat treated frames, barrels, cylinders can weigh less and be just as strong as cast parts - and Ruger is an industry leader in casting. Just my experiences.

Stainz

Stainz I'm jealous you have a Ruger Old Army. That is on my list. I'm not big on black powder but I love the Ruger Old Army.

 

[SW&Larry]

I have both. A 29-10 and a GP100.

Overall, the M29 has better fit and finish. It's not like it's a huge difference though.

The GP100 has rougher edges. Especially the edges on the trigger guard.

However, the trigger face is MUCH better than the M29. It's smooth, rounded, and comfortable. The M29 is wide, flat and serrated.

There is one thing of zero doubt. The GP100 truly is a tank.

 

[Hardbark]

Not a good time for me to reply as I have a down S&W at the moment, but here goes.....
They are both great guns within there limitations. If you are a high volume shooter as I am, with heavy bullet, moderate pressure loads, you are going to shoot your S&W loose. Period. I have had two 29/629's rebuilt, and also a 625-6 Mt Gun. Those three guns also had to have their barrels (front sight) properly indexed to 12 o'clock and their barrel/cylinder gaps reduced to less than a stack of playing cards.
Rugers need a trigger job. Otherwise they are robust to the point of absurdity. My current CCW revolver is a SP101, 327 Federal. Fantastic combination. Have never shot loose a Blackhawk, or Redhawk. I've never had to worry about breaking a Ruger.

 

[DR505]

I like Ruger Single Action and Smith & Wesson Double Action revolvers. Here are two examples from my collection...top is a 10mm Vaquero (thanks Alan Harton!), bottom is a .41 magnum 657.

 

[TexasRider]

Nice looking 41.

Somehow the Ruger SAs dont seem to cooperate with me shooting them. The grip angles with the more curved down and straight somehow dont suit me as well as the SRH or the GP. I sold my New Super Blackhawk Hunter as I am more accurate with my older Super RedHawk.

 

[grumpy7159]

I have a 625 and 627 that I shoot on a regular basis. I had problems with both. My blackhawk and redhawks have worked flawlessly. The Smiths have repairs completed and now work as well as the Rugers. I was going to have the Smiths engraved but they both have the Bill Clinton locks and would look like a big red pimple on the prom queens nose.

 

[David Sinko]

Who competes and wins with Ruger DA revolvers? Nobody. Why? Because they are clumsy and unrefined. They are also very difficult to repair. Need a hammer or trigger for a Redhawk? Ruger will not sell you one. Ever try to change a firing pin after it has peened out from heavy use? Good luck. Take a look at a Ruger DA revolver and see if you can even figure out how to do it. The transfer bar mechanism is inferior to anything S&W. Ruger has fooled a lot of people over the years with its "more steel is better" marketing ploy. As far as I'm concerned the S&W is clearly the better design. Quality control and customer service are separate issues which must not be confused with the engineering and design of the product.

Dave Sinko

 

[The Highlander]

I own both, carry both too when I don't have a new-fangled semi-auto on my belt. Just got my wife's ruger back from a trip to Arizona to fix a minor issue. And waiting on a response from S&W to send my new 627 Pro Series back to them for a crown that was apparently done with a round file instead of CNC.

I love both. The Smith's look a touch better in most flavors, but I have a GP-100 High Polish that is easily the match of any of my Smith's for finish. The two most accurate revolvers I own are also split. A GP and a 10. With either I am scary accurate.

A 342 Ti is my pocket gun, had it since 2000. But if I were buying one today it would probably be an LCR instead.

My newest Ruger is a .22 SP. the finish frankly sucked, and the trigger is horrendous. But, I fixed the hammer with sandpaper and elbow grease (it was probably the file Smith used to crown my 627). Working on the trigger next. It fits my hand like a glove, has 8 shots, fiber optic sights for my old eyes, and has replaced my 34 as plinker of choice now that the hammer doesn't draw blood.

The ejector rod on my brand spanking new PC gun unscrewed and tied up the gun on its first range trip. Yep, I said my PC gun! And the new Pro Series is going back to Smith.

Bottom line, I love them both. Had issues with both, had great service with both.

 

[oldcorps76]

Big fan of 50's-60's Smiths. But the newer Classics, if you don't mind the chemical casehardening and lawyer lock, are lovely. But the Rugers are workhorses that simply ... work. I am not fond of the Ruger DAs except for the SP-101 and that is strictly a personal thing. I do have one of the new Blackhawk Flattop .44 Specials and it will be buried with me.

Bottom line.....both are quality pieces that have their own unique advantages. Save up for some of each....

 

[roundels]

Ruger vs. S&W

I have and like both, but quality in the newer Smiths is hit and miss at best (sorry, guys). I spent a ton of dough on one of the Classic Model 40s a few years back (the one with the Turnbull case hardened frame), and it broke my heart to get it home and clean it up only to find that the cylinder had a dished belt around the middle from the polishing process. Factory buggered screw holes and an action that was rough as a cob were the icing on the cake. The Ruger, on the other hand, looks perfect and shoots like it too. I know that S&W has to turn a profit, but I'd be embarassed to have to sell a new one to somebody who can still remember when.

 

[Swengen]

I had Gemini Customs remove the safety from my Smith 340PD. Just got it back today in fact. $10 for that service and worth every penny. You can't go wrong with either gun maker in my opinion. But, I do tend to have some custom work done on all of my guns with the exception of my Smith model 66-9 Performance Center gun which of course didn't need anything done at all!